Network News

Get the Morning Fix and the new Afternoon Fix delivered to your inbox or mobile device for easy access to the top political stories of the day. All you need is one click to get Morning Fix and Afternoon Fix!

FixCam Week in Preview: The Fix Is Out

SAN FRANCISCISO, Calif. -- The Fix has traveled to the West Coast for a week of rest and relaxation with Mrs. Fix.

Unlike past "vacations," I am going to do my best to stay away from the computer entirely this week. The Fix editors will be putting up posts intermittently, however, so make sure to stop by the site occasionally during the week.

Thanks, as always, for your support of The Fix and I'll be back rested and ready next Monday!

A new N. Carolina poll of African American voters released today shows HC with 18% of their vote. That could be significant b/c it is an increase of 10% with voters projected just last week to go 92-8% for Senator Obama.

Silent Cal, I was mostly referring to the 69.6% of African American births being out-of-wedlock. The dissolution of the family can be traced to most of society's problems, including drug abuse, rampant crime, lack of parental investment (time and money) in education, etc.

Whites (and other races) suffer from that as well, but not nearly so much.

Hey "FIXCAM" , -- Fix this: -- Hello CONGRESS !!?? Where is Our Congress?! - Why has not the War Profiteers and Economic Terrorists been prosecuted and jailed?! Bush / Cheney, Haliburton, and KBR - Are Responsible, and the buck ends with Bush. Why are they not in prison? Please tell the American Citizens why. CONGRESS, what are You doing about these Criminal Acts in Iraq?! - $19,000,000,000 missing at a minimum!! How? That is enough $money to give 190,000 of Our poorest FAMILIES each a suitcase with $100,000 in each! How can that much money go un-accounted for?! Treason, War-Profiteering, and the Looting of America must stop NOW!! "Congress wake up",- You are also accountable and are violating your' oaths of office. Soverign Citizens Unite, and order the CONGRESS to do it's Job!! - This Economic Terrorist Network Must be Arrested. - What in hell is going on in Washington D.C.? - jward52

"only a lunatic would argue that blacks (or any Americans) are worse off today (financially) than they were in '64. "

Actually my diagnosis was mentally challenged but functionally adequete. they released me later that week. lunatic is considered a pejorative term now, unless it is applied to bush in which case it is considered complementary.

In mid 2007, Senator Reid noted that McCain missed 10 of the past 14 votes on Iraq. However, here is a summary of a dozen votes (two that he missed and ten that he voted against) with respect to Iraq, funding for veterans or for troops, including equipment and armor. I have also included other snippets related to the time period when the vote occurred.

September 2007: McCain voted against the Webb amendment calling for adequate troop rest between deployments. At the time, nearly 65% of people polled in a CNN poll indicted that "things are going either moderately badly or very badly in Iraq.

July 2007: McCain voted against a plan to drawdown troop levels in Iraq. At the time, an ABC poll found that 63% thought the invasion was not worth it, and a CBS News poll found that 72% of respondents wanted troops out within 2 years.

March 2007: McCain was too busy to vote on a bill that would require the start of a drawdown in troop levels within 120 days with a goal of withdrawing nearly all combat troops within one year. Around this time, an NBC News poll found that 55% of respondents indicated that the US goal of achieving victory in Iraq is not possible. This number has not moved significantly since then.

February 2007: For such a strong supporter of the escalation, McCain didn't even bother to show up and vote against a resolution condemning it. However, at the time a CNN poll found that only 16% of respondents wanted to send more troops to Iraq (that number has since declined to around 10%), while 60% said that some or all should be withdrawn. This number has since gone up to around 70%.

June 2006: McCain voted against a resolution that Bush start withdrawing troops but with no timeline to do so.

May 2006: McCain voted against an amendment that would provide $20 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for health care facilities.

April 2006: McCain was one of only 13 Senators to vote against $430,000,000 for the Department of Veteran Affairs for Medical Services for outpatient care and treatment for veterans.

March 2006: McCain voted against increasing Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes.

March 2004: McCain once again voted for abusive tax loopholes over veterans when he voted against creating a reserve fund to allow for an increase in Veterans' medical care by $1.8 billion by eliminating abusive tax loopholes. Jeez, McCain really loves those tax loopholes for corporations, since he voted for them over our veterans' needs.

October 2003: McCain voted to table an amendment by Senator Dodd that called for an additional $322,000,000 for safety equipment for United States forces in Iraq and to reduce the amount provided for reconstruction in Iraq by $322,000,000.

April 2003: McCain urged other Senate members to table a vote (which never passed) to provide more than $1 billion for National Guard and Reserve equipment in Iraq related to a shortage of helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests.

August 2001: McCain voted against increasing the amount available for medical care for veterans by $650,000,000. To his credit, he also voted against the 2001 Bush tax cuts, which he now supports making permanent, despite the dire financial condition this country is in, and despite the fact that he indicated in 2001 that these tax cuts unfairly benefited the very wealthy at the expense of the middle class.

So there it is. John McCain is yet another republican former military veteran who likes to talk a big game when it comes to having the support of the military. Yet, time and time again, he has gone out of his way to vote against the needs of those who are serving in our military. If he can't even see his way to actually doing what the troops want, or what the veterans need, and he doesn't have the support of veterans, then how can he be a credible commander in chief?

yes yes, I know, we all want the WaPo to go back to required registration for posts. But at least some people are getting creative.

And Mark, you and I are in agreement: only a lunatic would argue that blacks (or any Americans) are worse off today (financially) than they were in '64. Yes, whites have it better than blacks, for a bunch of different reasons - they had a head start, they don't have a culture with many self-destructive elements, etc.

The National Journal piece from this past weekend is only one of many we've seen recently. Less than three weeks ago, the AP reported:

U.S. soldiers are committing suicide at record levels, young officers are abandoning their military careers, and the heavy use of forces in Iraq has made it harder for the military to fight conflicts that could arise elsewhere.

Unprecedented strains on the nation's all-volunteer military are threatening the health and readiness of the troops.

Less than a month before that, Army Vice Chief of Staff Richard Cody testified before Congress:

Given the current theater demand for Army forces, we are unable to provide a sustainable tempo of deployments for our Soldiers and Families. Soldiers, Families, support systems, and equipment are stretched and stressed by the demands of lengthy and repeated deployments, with insufficient recovery time. Equipment used repeatedly in harsh environments is wearing out more rapidly than programmed. Army support systems, designed for the pre-9/11 peacetime Army, are straining under the accumulation of stress from six years at war. Overall, our readiness is being consumed as fast as we build it.

F'or eight years, Clinton and Gore have extended our military commitments while depleting our military power. Rarely has so much been demanded of our armed forces, and so little given to them in return. George W. Bush and I are going to change that, too.'

Fast forward, 8 years:

"The once-mighty 'King of Battle'" is a "dead branch walking," write the active-duty colonels in the five-page document obtained by National Journal. With "growing alarm," they describe "deterioration" in artillery readiness to perform its most basic missions. In training, "firing incidents (occur) during every rotation"; "crew drills are very slow, and any type of (disorder) halts operations"; and, absent instructor intervention, "most" cannon platoons would have fired in unsafe conditions, the memo says.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have drawn experienced artillery troops into other jobs--like infantry and transportation--where soldiers are badly needed, the authors write. Ninety percent of fire-support personnel have been reassigned, leaving behind fewer than 10 percent certified for the mission."

One of the strangest things about the NAACP Wright pseudo-scientific speech on learning, and its enthusiastic CNN coverage and analysis, was the abject racialism of Wright. It was sort of an inverse Bell-Curve presentation, based on assumed DNA differences.

His convoluted explanation of African-American right-brain 'oral' culture as more creative, musical, and spontaneous versus European left-brain traditional analysis could never have been given by someone white to that audience without justifiably earning booing and catcalls.

Three comments: this was just the sort of racist 'genetic' difference that most Americans learned to shun, now apparently quite acceptable again, and part of the mainstream.

Second, there is no evidence that so-called Europeans could not "rap" or create an oral literature as well as Africans -- remember, oral poetry as we know it , began with bards like Homer somewhere in the southeastern Aegean and continued into modern times in the Balkans.

Three, some of the most accomplished speakers of English and analytical thinkers are African-Americans, a fact everyone immediately recognizes from what they read and with whom they speak.

In short, Wright's speech on black-right brainers, white-left brainers -- replete with bogus stereotypes and crude voice imitations -- was about as racist as they come and at one time antithetical to what the NAACP was once all about. Again, the Obama campaign and its appendages have set back racial relations a generation. Just ten years ago, any candidate, black or white, would have rejected Wright making a speech about genetic differences in respective black and white brains. Now it's given to civil rights organizations by the possible next President's pastor and spiritual advisor -- and done to wild applause for an organization founded on the idea that we are innately the same, while being gushed over by ignorant "commentators."

As I said before, between Wright's racism and hatred, and Obama's contextualization of what he has said, we have so lowered the bar that the next racist (and he won't necessarily be black) who evokes hatred of other races and then offers a mish-mash pop theory of genetic differences will have plenty of "context" to ward off public fury.

Ttoo much Fox News may be bad news for conservatives. An April 2007 Pew Research Study survey found that viewers of the conservative Fox News channel had the lowest knowledge of national and international affairs.

This weekend, "surge" architect and American Enterprise Institute fellow Frederick Kagan took to the pages of the Weekly Standard to offer "a definition of success in Iraq." Over at Attackerman, Spencer dissects what he deems "a classic of the Fred Kagan 'everything in Iraq is A-OK!' genre," writing that "what Kagan puts on offer isn't a definition of success, it's a wish list." Spencer also critiques Kagan's assessment of the relationship between Iraq and Iran, as well as how Kagan wants the U.S. to "stay in Iraq to make sure Iraq doesn't become like Pakistan" while doing "nothing whatsoever about Pakistan."

mark: there is a difference between winning inner city voters like Ron Kirk and Lee Brown did in their succesful mayorial elections and winning county or state wide elections i.e. Kirk's failed run against Cornyn. That has also been the exact same problem in Ds winning in Harris Cty judicial races and Cty Commissioner races once the electorate expands beyond the city voting lines. Which is exactly the problem with the Obama campaign. When the electoral base leaves inner cities like in St. Louis or Philadelphia,where the African American vote is minimal, his % of the vote collapses. We have come a long way mark, but rural and county voters vote much more conservatively and Rev Wright seems to have now painted Sen Obama in the minority box that he never wanted to be in and reducing his appeal to rural voters that he may have had previously. Its a reality of electoral politics that Rendell was attacted for proclaiming.

Frankly, I find the Obama phenomenon a total mystery. He has the most left-wing voting record in the U.S. Senate, but claims he's the guy who can bring Republicans and Democrats together. In his books and in his church attendance, he proves that he sees everything through a prism of race, but he contends he's the guy who can unite blacks and whites.

I find it absurd that his entire platform consists of two extremely vague words -- hope and change. That was pretty much the same thing the Democrats promised us before taking control of the House and Senate in 2006.

Well, recently, a friend of mine reminded me that just prior to the 2006 election, consumer confidence was unbelievably high; regular gasoline sold for about $2.25-a-gallon; and the unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since then, consumer confidence has plummeted; gas now costs about a dollar-and-a-half-a-gallon more; unemployment stands at 5%; American homeowners have seen their home equity drop by over a trillion dollars, with one percent of our homes in foreclosure; and, for good measure, the liberals refuse to eliminate earmarks.

It wasn't all bad news, though. The Democratic-controlled Congress, no doubt in appreciation for what they regarded as a job very well done, voted to increase their own salaries.

So, I can only assume that the change that Barack Obama longs for is to see the Republicans re-claim the House and Senate. If so, it's the only thing the man has ever said or done with which I heartily agree.

"While many Democrats are quick to dismiss McCain (he's too old, he's too closely identified with Bush), my sense is that there are any number of independents and even some Democrats who could respond to McCain's personal story and the sort of campaign he is planning.

McCain's brand -- war hero, party maverick, straight talker -- remains largely untarnished in the eyes of the average voter since he first appeared on the national scene in 200."

Look mister, don't forget that I outweigh you and everyone always said I was the man of the house. You pick up the kid from group. it is father issues anyway. blogging is important to me and the other bloggers rely on me to provide needed information for the hate campaign.

Pardon us, we just discovered that the clintons are a couple of lying, cheating, self-aggrandizing frauds. We didn't want to admit this before for selfish reasons.

But now we are fully prepared to look the other way again and nominate the return of Jimmy carter. Only after the landslide loss will the long knives emerge blaming Dean, Kennedy and the rest of the fossils for our stupidity and blindness.

Just like Obama sat in that pew for 20 years and didn't hear, we sit here and don't see. It is the Lib way.

claudia, come back to bed. I don't have to work until 8 tonight. the welfare check comes in whether you blog or not. Please give up on the writing career already, you know how succesful it has been. Besides I don't think those ohter bloggers respect you for the immense hairy creature you are. Only I know that side of you and the love for your meanness. Some one has to pick up the kid from group at 3 so let's get moving. I will shave your back like I promised if you return now.

most Americans, I don't question your political affiliation or the rationale you may have for being a liberal. Yes, I am proud to be a Republican, the party of universal suffrage, civil rights, and equality before the law. The party for the constitution and against activist judges, the party for limited governement and against socialist bureaucracy. The party for strength, not uncertainty, for results instead of rhetoric.

I am quite certain that the black population of the USA is far better off today in terms of both standard of living and integration into the fabric of America than it was in 1964. Like JD, I would want to see any statistics to the contrary.

I believe it was Moynihan who pointed out that the Civil Rights revolution moved about 60% of black Americans into the middle class, but left the neighborhoods they moved out of without a leadership cadre. I will try to find that source.

A black R or D could NOT have been elected Chief Justice of the TX Supreme Court in 1964, or Mayor of [predominantly not black] Houston or Dallas. I am not arguing that we have achieved "post-racialism" - I am only stating that if Michelle Obama actually said that, she is mistaken, and perhaps suffering under a cloud that her husband publicly does not claim as his own.

This blog is practically unreadable without registration. I thought the removal of registration was a technical glitch, but it still hasn't been corrected, so this place has become completely moronic. Nice job, Washington Post.

I really have nothing positive to add so instead I will spew my hate all day and cut and paste my usual nonsense from Kos, Huff, MM and the rest. It beats thinking but I don't get why we keep losing elections. why are we LIBs such losers? Aren't the rest of you stupid enough to fall for this. I know I am.

why is my own life so empty? Can you imagine a person who'e entire reason for being is to post stale news on this blog? that's me. Help me someone.

Small Business Is In Trouble Under McCain Plan
Much has been said lately by Elizabeth Edwards and others about individuals who would be in trouble under the McCain health care plan. But they aren't the only ones. McCain's plan could very well leave the engine of America's economy out in the cold as well -- small businesses.

Small businesses face significant barriers in getting and keeping health insurance. Recent survey data from the National Federal of Independent Business bear this out, with 81 percent of small business owners indicating that "finding affordable healthcare" is a challenge, with 16 percent calling it was their biggest challenge.

The reason is that small businesses do not have enough people to create a "stable risk pool." That's insurance gibberish for simply saying that, if just one employee develops a catastrophic disease or has a major accident, then the insurance company loses money on that small business. In the insurance marketplace, small businesses don't have it much easier than individuals.

To help small businesses, the majority of states take steps to cap premium rates within a certain range (technically called a "rate band"), and many states will also cap the annual increase in premiums. As research from Georgetown University shows, some states have strong protections, like California. Other states do not, like Kentucky and Louisiana where insurers are allowed to increase rates by more than 20% in a single year for a small business (most states only permit increases smaller than that). Very few states offer no rate protections: District of Columbia, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.

The McCain plan will create a rush to the bottom among insurers in these rules. McCain's idea to allow insurance companies to sell policies over state lines will weaken small business protections by enabling businesses to simply market insurance policies around the country from states with weak protections. There would be no reason for an insurance company to sell a policy anywhere other than from states with weak insurance rules. And McCain seems ok with being willing to ignore consumer protections by saying, "That would be mandating what the free enterprise system does."

Hey proudtobeGOP, how proud were you when Katrina hit as Bush was playing guitar in California?

How proud were you when the Abu Ghraib pictures came out?

How proud were you when the military invented the heroic tale of Jessica Lynch? (not her fault)

How proud were you when the Bush administration IGNORED the President's Daily Brief entitled "Obama Determined to Strike in U.S."?

How proud were you when economic indicators began to say "recession" - and the U.S. with NO rainy day fund (spent in Iraq), no financial reserves with which to invest in the economy (spent in Iraq) and not much international good will left (spent in Iraq)?

How proud are you that food AND fuel prices are hitting record highs, in part because Bush's idea of alternative fuels begins and ends with ethanol? and in part because he will not use whatever regulatory/personal influence he has to compel the oil companies - who are now gobbling a larger than ever slice of the American financial pie - NOT to dive into the federal budget and come up with a fish squirming in their beaks? ("Squirming in their beeeeeaks.....")

I would suggest that you change your screen name to reflect those values which the GOP used to represent. How about "proudtobeBULLMOOSEPARTY," or maybe "proudtobeFROMTHEPARTYOFLINCOLN"?
You could also try: "proudtobeGOPBUTWAIT,LETMEHASTILYADDTHATIVOTEDFORMCCAINBACKINTHE2000PRIMARYBACKBEFOREHEBEGANKISSINGTHEASSESOFTHEPLUTOCRATSANDRELIGIOUSRIGHT."

I believe that reaching out and engaging with Iran, but doing so with Russia, doing so with our European allies, recognizing that they do have contacts into Iran, and engaging in a full-court diplomatic press with Iran is a good thing to begin the process of doing that.

You know, we're not going to go into Iran militarily. The senator is absolutely right. Iran is not Iraq. And going in there militarily would be, from my perspective, a huge mistake."

The National Press Club Q&A session with Rev. Wright this morning put a serious nail in the coffin of Obama's candidacy. Hillary and Bill are delirious today.

Not only did Wright reiterate his comment that Obama did what a "politician" has to do... he showed Obama to be politically naive in his refusal to totally disassociate himself from Wright. Obama refused to toss Wright overboard and what does Obama get? Wright tossing him overboard bigtime... first in the Moyers interview, then, just in case anyone didn't get the message, to the D.C. press corps.

Obama cannot recover from this. If Carville called Richardson a "Judas" then what is this?

It's over... unless the supers, in the end, elect to reject the Hillary resurrection and work with Obama to throw his delegates to what used to be called a "dark horse" candidate (such as an Al Gore or a John Edwards). That's still in the cards, especially if Hillary doesn't quickly pivot and stop attacking fellow Democrats.

And the Fix is laying low in 'Frisco while the tide once again turns? C'mon, Chris, get YOUR mojo workin'....

hey drindl, How does it feel being joined at the lip with Howard Dean? Have you been practicing your primal scream, too?

While your side cannot agree on a candidate or even a nominating process, the headlines read:

McCain Runs Strong as Democrats Battle

In a USA TODAY Poll taken April 18-20, McCain kept the contest against Obama and Clinton within the survey's margin of error. Obama vs McCain 47%-44% among registered voters. Clinton vs McCain 50%-44%.

"The American people did not support the goals of nation-building, peacemaking, law and order and certainly not warlord funding. For us to get into nation-building, law and order, etc, I think is a tragic and terrible mistake. But the argument that somehow the United States would suffer a loss to our prestige and our viability, as far as the No. 1 superpower in the world, I think, is baloney. The fact is, what can hurt our prestige, Mr. President, I'll tell you what can hurt our viability, as the world's superpower, and that is, if we enmesh ourselves in a drawn-out situation, which entails the loss of American lives, more debacles like the one we saw with the failed mission to capture Aidid's lieutenants, using American forces, and that then will be what hurts our prestige."

---McCain in 1993

"The right course of action is to make preparations as quickly as possible to bring our people home. It does not mean as soon as order is restored to Haiti, it doesn't mean as soon as Democracy is flourishing in Haiti, it doesn't mean as soon as we've established a viable nation in Haiti. As soon as possible means as soon as we can get out of Haiti without losing any American lives.

"Now there may be different interpretations of this Resolution on the other side, but it is my view---and I want to make it clear and I think the majority of the American people's view---that as soon as possible means as soon as possible. Exactly what those words state."

With Americans facing record levels of credit card debt, "financial institutions have sharply raised rates for credit card customers -- even those who pay on time -- as they grapple with losses from other bad consumer loans." Banks are also imposing higher fees for late payments and ATM withdrawals to boost profits.

Posted by: and you get shafted again | April 28, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

the usual gop racism, raw and brutal...

menatime, the taxpayers continue to get r*ped in Iraq...

'An audit from Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction Stuart Bowen reveals that "of 47,321 reconstruction projects worth billions of dollars found that at least 855 contracts were terminated by U.S. officials before their completion, primarily because of unforeseen factors such as violence and excessive costs." But "many reconstruction projects were being described as complete" when they were not.'

On Saturday, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman argued on his blog that "the combination of the Bush tax cuts and McCain's extensions and revisions would leave the federal government without sufficient revenue to do its job." Krugman added that McCain's top economic adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, is resorting to "sophistry" to defend McCain's plans. In his Times column today, Krugman continues his critique, saying that McCain's economic proposals are "Bush made permanent":

The McCain campaign wants us to accept the success of that deception as a fact of life. Mr. Holtz-Eakin is saying, in effect, "We're not engaged in any new irresponsibility -- we're just perpetuating the Bush administration's irresponsibility. That doesn't count."

It's the sort of fiscal double-talk that has been a Bush administration hallmark. In any case, it offers no answer to the principal point raised by the Tax Policy Center analysis, which has nothing to do with scoring: the McCain tax plan would leave the federal government with far too little revenue to cover its expenses, leading to huge budget deficits."

Obama will suspend his campaign after Indiana IF Hillary agrees to take him on as VP... which a month ago would have been a given, but in light of the PA results and the resurrection of Rev. Wright, is not at all a certainty.

Obama is showing an inability to mix it up. He's lost his mojo. Hill's got hers, if she can keep Bill's mouth zippered (oops, bad choice of words there).

And Chris Cillizza... are you losing YOUR mojo? I mean, how hard is it to relax all day and post a quick evening blog? When a premiere blogger for a major newspaper goes on hiatus in the midst of a campaign, perhaps that's a signal that it really IS winding down, as the once and future "inevitable" candidate rises Phoenix-like to confound the punditocracy....

Chris -- have you joined the rest of us who just want to be woken when it's over?

~~~

In other thoughts: sometimes Obama seems like a racehorse crossing the finish line, only to discover that Clinton is acting like his jockey. She says, "I win! This gluepot horse couldn't have crossed the finish line without me whipping him along!" while Obama keeps thinking how much faster he could have completed the race without her on his back. And been more rested at the end to boot.

George Will writes: Michelle Obama, who was born in 1964, says that most Americans' lives have "gotten progressively worse since I was a little girl."

Since 1960, real per capita income has increased 143 percent, life expectancy has increased by seven years, infant mortality has declined 74 percent, deaths from heart disease have been halved, childhood leukemia has stopped being a death sentence, depression has become a treatable disease, air and water pollution have been drastically reduced, the number of women earning a bachelor's degree has more than doubled, the rate of homeownership has increased 10.2 percent, the size of the average American home has doubled, the percentage of homes with air conditioning has risen from 12 to 77, the portion of Americans who own shares of stock has quintupled ...

Has Mrs. Obama perhaps missed some pertinent developments in this country that she calls "just downright mean"?

Will the media this week give Obama a pass on refusing to debate Clinton before the Indiana and North Carolina primaries on May 6?

Will he be chastised for his lame excuse? "We've had 21, and so what we've said is with two weeks, two big states, we want to make sure we're talking to as many folks as possible on the ground, taking questions from voters," Obama said on "Fox News Sunday."

Will it be left to conservatives like the estimable blogger "Allahpundit" (at hotair.com) to (sarcastically) state the obvious? "What's the most efficient way to communicate with voters? Surely not at a massively promoted, televised, highly watched debate. Much better to hold a few town halls and meet and greets."

We have had four one-on-one debates so far -- and each has been revealing. A debate without a moderator, as Clinton has suggested, could be particularly interesting.

But debates would give Clinton equal time in the spotlight, and would make Obama's advantage in paid media in Indiana and North Carolina far less significant.

On Friday in Indiana, Obama talked tough in response to a question: "I get pretty fed up with people questioning my patriotism." And, he continued, "I am happy to have that debate with them any place, anytime."

He's happy to have fantasy debates with unnamed people who are allegedly challenging his patriotism. But he's not willing to have a real debate with the real person he's competing against for the nomination.

Will Obama pay no price for ducking? Should paid advertisements determine the Democratic victor, not the performance of the two candidates debating at length in an unscripted setting?